(^522) THE WEALTH AND POVERTY OF NATIONS
me, however. The present tendency to global industrial diffusion will
entail, for the richer countries, a leveling down of wages, increased in
equality of incomes, and/or high levels of (transitional?) unemploy
ment. No one has abrogated the law of supply and demand. Many, if
not most, economists will disagree. They rely here on the sacred cer
tainty of gains from trade for all. International competition, they tell us,
is a positive-sum game: everyone benefits.
In the long run. This is not the place to attempt, in a few pages, a
survey of the differences of opinion on this issue, which continues to
generate a library of material.^18 I would simply argue here, from the
historical record, that
—The gains from trade are unequal. As history has shown, some
countries will do much better than others. The primary reason is
that comparative advantage is not the same for all, and that some
activities are more lucrative and productive than others. (A dollar
is not a dollar is not a dollar.) They require and yield greater gains
in knowledge and know-how, within and without.
—The export and import of jobs is not the same as trade in com
modities. The two may be fungible in theory, but the human im
pact is very different.
—Comparative advantage is not fixed, and it can move for or against.
—It always helps to attend and respond to the market. But just be
cause markets give signals does not mean that people will respond
timely or well. Some people do this better than others, and culture
can make all the difference.
—Some people find it easier and more agreeable to take than to
make. This temptation marks all societies, and only moral training
and vigilance can hold it in check.
Withal, I do not want to advocate any particular national policy, the
less so as activist intervention can as easily make things worse as bet
ter. Each case must be judged on the merits, and governments are ca
pable of as many mistakes, and bigger, than the businessmen who try
to shape and play the market. (And vice versa. Much depends on what
one is trying to maximize—wealth, equality, security, salvation, or what
have you.)^19 I just want to say that the current pattern of technologi
cal diffusion and catch-up development will press hard on the haves, es
pecially the individual victims of economic regrouping, while bringing
"goodies" and hope to some of the have-nots, and despair, disap
pointment, and anger to many of the others.
nora
(Nora)
#1